Ethical Norms and Values
The Ethical Norms and Values
The article “Ethical Norms and Values for Marketers” has just opened my eyes to understanding more and taking clearer picture about marketing system, and the intentions and proclamation of it, promoted by the American Marketing Association (AMA) in US. I admire their intense, neutral sounding principles.
First of all, AMA are a non-profit organization. And their principles; for instance, are made for betterment of intercommunication with any stakeholder (customers, employees, peers, and so on), full responsible, neutral siding, and consider environmental stewardship in their decision-making. Thus, they’re claiming that they provide stakeholder with the highest standard of values and norms, and I believe this. Norms are already - planed-part for an individual based on the majority of the society’s expectancy. And values include morality, importance and desire the marketers find.
If I were Cicero, I would still have agreed on some of the statements of the ethics. But there are a few that Cicero would also disagree on. So, I as Cicero would answer as a first person. One of the main principles I very disagree on in the article is the first list under ‘Fairness’ that the marketers “represent products in a clear way in selling, advertising and other forms of communication; this includes the avoidance of false, misleading and deceptive promotion.“ But according to my theory and story, even though he knows there are vermin in the attic of the house he’s selling, he doesn’t have to go too far as long as he “declare any defects as far as required by law but otherwise” the house-seller “has no other obligations.” It’s because if he tells the buyer the truth, he is more likely to lose him and will have no profit. Yet, it is still important to keep ethical norms and values. But how? How does telling the truth about the vermin in the attic not become moral issue according to the AMA? That’s why I find some parts of the article are
The article “Ethical Norms and Values for Marketers” has just opened my eyes to understanding more and taking clearer picture about marketing system, and the intentions and proclamation of it, promoted by the American Marketing Association (AMA) in US. I admire their intense, neutral sounding principles.
First of all, AMA are a non-profit organization. And their principles; for instance, are made for betterment of intercommunication with any stakeholder (customers, employees, peers, and so on), full responsible, neutral siding, and consider environmental stewardship in their decision-making. Thus, they’re claiming that they provide stakeholder with the highest standard of values and norms, and I believe this. Norms are already - planed-part for an individual based on the majority of the society’s expectancy. And values include morality, importance and desire the marketers find.
If I were Cicero, I would still have agreed on some of the statements of the ethics. But there are a few that Cicero would also disagree on. So, I as Cicero would answer as a first person. One of the main principles I very disagree on in the article is the first list under ‘Fairness’ that the marketers “represent products in a clear way in selling, advertising and other forms of communication; this includes the avoidance of false, misleading and deceptive promotion.“ But according to my theory and story, even though he knows there are vermin in the attic of the house he’s selling, he doesn’t have to go too far as long as he “declare any defects as far as required by law but otherwise” the house-seller “has no other obligations.” It’s because if he tells the buyer the truth, he is more likely to lose him and will have no profit. Yet, it is still important to keep ethical norms and values. But how? How does telling the truth about the vermin in the attic not become moral issue according to the AMA? That’s why I find some parts of the article are